If you are to invest your time productively in solving the public problems
behind inflation, you need a political party that will not waste your time.
The state of the economy indicates that both the Democrats and the Republicans
are wasting a lot of time that could and should be used to solve problems.
The Democrats and Republicans fail primarily because neither are what they
claim to be. In the original and literal senses of the words, the Democrats
are not democratic and the Republicans are not capitalistic.

Capitalism originated as a means of increasing production per capita by pooling
resources. Today, capitalism merely means the manipulation of stocks, bonds,
currency and other symbols of production, time, and capital regardless of
the effects on production. And, in many cases, the manipulation of these
symbols exacts a decapitation or reduction of production per capita.

Another contradictory use of "capital" by Republicans is in the phrase "capital
formation." A frequent abuser of this phrase was Reagan's Secretary of Treasury:
Donald Regan. Regan's policies did not increase capital formation. A better
description is "capital handling" which results in a dilution and deformation
of capital. The more human resources (capita) concentrated in handling and
manipulating capital symbols, the fewer human heads producing the substance
of wealth.

Very clearly, if we all became stockbrokers, a lot of capital handling would
result. To the likes of Regan and Reagan, this would be "capital formation."
But would any substance be produced with this Republican capital formation?

The Republicans are capitalistic only if one is willing to divorce completely
the word "capital" from its original and literal meaning. In so doing, one
should expect an inflationary, problem-filled world as a result of such semantic
slippage. America has become such a world under the Republicans, in part.

Similarly, one can call the Democrats democratic only if one ignores the
original and literal meaning of the word "democracy." Democracy means "divisions
of people rule." Do the Democrats divisionally organize the people to rule
on the problems of the people? Or, do the Democrats assume a despotic attitude
toward solving the people's problems?

One clear indication of an undemocratic party is the development of "old
faces" at the top. When a political party has the same bosses that it did
decades ago, it is safe to assume that the party is not democratic and that
the leaders will be isolated from the people and the problems. A good example
of an undemocratic Democrat is Edward Kennedy.

Edward Kennedy is an old face who has been using the same approach to problems
as he did when he first entered the Senate in the 1960s. Problems have not
been solved; one man has dominated and manipulated the existing problem-solving
process instead of leading the organization of people into a more democratic
process. A clear example of how both he and the Democratic party are undemocratic
is implicit in a statement of his:

It is clear, however, that the Democratic Party must bring itself into the
20th century from the viewpoint of technology, organization and ability to
get its message across.

Ted has 20th century thinking in terms of technology. However, note the implied
despotism when he says that Democrats have the "message." His remark implies
that the problem-suffering people are not the ones to develop the message.
Given his mental frame that the party is the answer, one can only suspect
that his call for 20th century organization is not a call for democratic
teamwork. Ted Kennedy symbolizes why the Democrats are not democratic. He
has hogged the problem-solving power for himself instead of leading in the
apportionment of problem-solving power to "divisions of people." He speaks
as though the Democrats have some inside information which the problem-solving
people do not have. In fact, the truth is just the opposite. The people have
the problem-solving messages; the people need a democratic organization to
get their messages across.

Other instances of undemocratic behavior by the Democrats can be cited. Look
at the 1980 and 1984 elections for example. When party heads reject the consensus
of the convention, is this rejection an instance of democracy or despotism?
Consider the following action:

Democratic leaders think they've already found a way to get around the party's
platform plank denying campaign funds to candidates who do not support the
equal-rights amendment

Although a convention is closer to "divisions of people rule" than the incumbent
heads of political parties, the Democrats still circumvented the will of
the people in the last major election (1980).

In the next Presidential election, 1984, the habitual Democrats intended
to dilute the will of the people once again.

The leaders of the Democratic Party are making a sincere and rather valiant
effort to get presidential politics back to where they can understand it.
They would like to preserve that grand American institution, the nominating
convention and, not incidentally, make it easier for either Edward Kennedy
or Walter Mondale to win the party's nomination in 1984.

This action is apparently intended to elect one of the two people chosen
to be the party's standard bearers: Kennedy or Mondale. Is it democracy when
a political party stacks the deck almost three years before the convention?
The Democrats are not democratic.

Why Democratic Capitalists?

Changes are needed to fill the democratic and capitalistic voids left by
the major parties. If any new political party is to gain ascendancy over
the Democrats and Republicans, it must fill these voids. Choosing a name
that indicates a commitment to the problem-solving, timistic
twins* of democracy and capitalism is a start. This
new party is the Democratic Capitalists.

This new party will be the party of time. Democracy and capitalism are
indispensable when it comes to solving time-wasting problems. Democracy is
the best process for solving public problems that affect a collection of
people. Capitalism is the best process for solving the problems that affect
people in their private lives. True democracy collects, filters, percolates
and hones the best problem-solvers for the immediate problems of a people.
True capitalism does the same thing for private, individual problems.

Union of Problem Sufferers

The Democratic Capitalists will not only be a political party, it will be
a union of inflationary sufferers. This union will use democracy and capitalism
to solve the time-wasting problems that are behind all inflationary suffering.
One problem is the people who are able to inflate their income without ever
having to strike a single day. Against these inflation chasers, the Democratic
Capitalists will organize people to strike using their non-work hours.

Unlike existing unions, the union of inflationary sufferers will not waste
their work time by striking during work hours. The Democratic Capitalist
will strike against the causes of inflation after hours to guarantee steady
income for his fellow members. Unlike existing unions, Democratic Capitalism
will educate the rank-and-file on why people should not strike against others
who are suffering from inflation.

The only way that any union can stop inflationary suffering is to strike
against the source of inflationary losses: the inflation chasers. These
inflationary privateers inflate their income without ever spending an hour
on the strike line: politicians, financiers, bankers, insurers and others.
Democratic Capitalism will productively organize people to strike against
the causes of inflation. Primarily, it will organize people to provide services
at anti-inflationary prices. The inflationary price-gougers will be underbid.

Originally, the Democratic Capitalists were envisioned as an American Solidarity
of Producers (ASP). ASP was considered an American counterpart of the Polish
Solidarity movement. The name of the new political party was updated from
ASP to NUSA because the American Solidarity of Producers did not contain
the guiding words to solving problems. Similarly, the Polish Solidarity movement
did not recognize the guiding principles whereby to escape their problem
ridden economy: democracy and capitalism.

The Polish Solidarity movement never got past the stage of listing problems.
Solidarity became nothing more than a national "bitch" session without any
productive organization of the people to solve their problems.

Sadly, the initial democratic tone of the Polish Solidarity movement faded
over the months as Solidarity became increasingly synonymous with Lech Walesa.
Walesa stayed at the top too long and never groomed anyone else. In the end,
this played into the hands of the Polish Communists. They could decimate
the union in substance while maintaining an air of respectability by courting
the unarrested Lech Walesa. In becoming the symbol of Solidarity, Walesa
generated the gap through which the communists could separate the people
from their organizational means. While appearing to respect Solidarity, in
the person of Walesa, the communists destroyed the infrastructure of the
Solidarity. While Walesa was being courted at a guest house, the offices,
files, telephones and personnel of Solidarity were decimated.

Democratic Capitalists must learn from the mistakes of Walesa and Solidarity
and never allow any gaps that the Republicans or Democrats could exploit.
One of the principles that will prevent the Democratic Capitalists from becoming
a one-person organization is the Salt Peter Principle. Everyone one is percolated
or required to "go back to square one" on a regular basis. This includes
the person at the top. Within Democratic Capitalism, no one stays in office
too long; there are frequent elections and no incumbency. The Democratic
Capitalists have a process that guarantees fresh faces and fresh ideas.

Another principle that the Democratic Capitalists must observe is "Don't
waste time talking to politicians." Given the nature of America and the
Constitutional right to recall and replace elected officials, the quickest
and most complete way to stop the inflationary problems is to replace the
Democrats and Republicans. Conversing with the nation's compromisers simply
delays the resurrection of a better day.

Either the Democratic Capitalists will or will not replace the Democrats
and the Republicans. If one wants a better America, he must concentrate his
efforts on organizing a new party and not waste his time talking with old,
unreformed politicians. However, so no problem-solving talent goes untapped,
Democratic Capitalists will readily embrace politicians who accept the NUSA
benefit of the doubt.

Programs for Democracy and Capitalism

The Democratic Capitalists are not without a program. Foremost, they will:

These things can be accomplished through a democratic organization of the
people. The benefits of democracy cannot be achieved or maintained without
democratic organization of the people. It is useless to try and implement
any democratic reforms without the existence of a democratic policy-making
process. This is one reason why talking to unreformed politicians is useless.

May the politicians not only see the light but join the enlightened way of
solving America's problems:

democracy per diem, and
capitalism per capita.

For the sake of a New United States of America, they will accept the NUSA
Benefit of the Doubt and join the Democratic Capitalists.

Warning: Anyone found
stealing lifehours will be forever banned from participation in and rewards
of Better Democracy and Capitalism. HomepageIndex